See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/241325575

The Vertical Farm: The sky-scraper as vehicle for a sustainable urban

agriculture

Article · January 2008

CITATIONS READS

7 2,763

2 authors, including:

Dickson D Despommier
Columbia University
86 PUBLICATIONS   3,031 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Vertical farming and the creation of the Eco-city View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Dickson D Despommier on 10 December 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 The Vertical Farm:
The sky-scraper as vehicle for a sustainable urban agriculture

Dickson Despommier1 and Eric Ellingsen2

1
Department of Environmental Health Sciences, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, 60 Haven Ave, Rm. 100,
New York, New York 10032, Email: ddd1@columbia.edu
2
College of Architecture, Illinois Institute of Technology, S.R. Crown Hall, 3360 S. State St
Chicago, Il 60616, Email: ellingsen@iit.edu

Abstract
The human population has reached some 6.4 billion individuals. Over 800 million hectares (i.e., nearly 38% of the total
landmass of the earth) is committed to producing crops to support this still growing population. Farming has
dramatically transformed the landscape, replacing and redefining functional ecosystems. Undeniably, a reliable food
supply has allowed for the evolution of culturally robust societies. Ironically, farming has created a set of new hazards
unique to activities involved with the production of food, and has exacerbated many older ones. Exposure to toxic levels
of agrochemicals (pesticides, fungicides) and a wide spectrum of geohelminths are transmitted with regularity at the
tropical and sub-tropical agricultural interface. Emerging infections, many of which are viral zoonoses (e.g., Ebola,
Lassa fever) have adapted to the human host following our encroachment into their environments. In 50 years, the
human population is expected to increase to some 8.3 billion individuals. Feeding these new arrivals will require an
additional 109 hectares of farmland; land that does not exist. Vertical, ddd1@columbia.edu ellingsen@iit.edu
urban farming in tall buildings involves fully
Dickson Donald Despommier
sustainable
Dickson energy
Donald use and creation
Despommier holds a Ph.in Da in
new and literal
Biology organic relationship
from University between
of Notre Dame engineering,
(1967), architecture,
a Masters in Science in
Medical Parasitology
technology, and global from Columbiaimperatives
agricultural University in(1964). He is acommunity
local based Professor of Public Health and Microbiology at Columbia
solutions.
University, NYC, 1982-present. Associate Professor of Public Health and Microbiology, Columbia University, NYC,1975-
1982.
Keywords: urban farming, tall buildings, sustainable energy use and creation
Dickson is an infectious disease ecologist with a strong interest in West Nile Virus epidemics in the United States. Dr.
Despommier also tracks other infectious diseases, such as malaria and trypanosomiasis, regarding and modeling their eco-
Introduction
logical requirements for transmission. His books include, West Nile Story, from Apple Trees Productions, 2001, and pp.
145 Despommier, Gwadz, Hotez, Knirsch in Parasitic Diseases 5th ed. An abbreviated list of the peer reviewed publica-
tions include PNAS, EcoHealth 3, Agriculture Today, Clin Microbiol Rev., and Parasitology Today. Recent presentations
include: Making Cities Livable, in Portland, Oregon, June 2007; The Vertical Farm Concept at the United Nations Confer-
ence on Climate Change, in September 2007; Agriculture in The Urban Landscape Innovating Metropolitan Agriculture, in
Beijing, China. October 2007; and The Vertical Farm: Agriculture for the 21st Century and Beyond, at the Royal Agricul-
tural Winter Fair, Toronto, Ontario, November 2007. For more information on Vertical Farming, please goto: http://www.
verticalfarm.com/

Eric C. Ellingsen
Eric C. Ellingsen holds a Masters of Architecture, and a Master of Landscape from the University of Pennsylvania, (2005);
Figure 1: hypothetical vertical farm : Images courtesy Gordon Graff
a Masters in Classical Philosophy, St. John’s College, Annapolis MD (2000). He is a Senior Lecturer at the College of
Architecture, Illinois Institute of Technology, and serves as Assistant Director of the Graduate Landscape Program. Past
As of includes
January working
2006, approximately 800 million wetlands were sacrificed, or at the very least severely
employment as a research assistant for Cecil Balmond, and office time in Field Operations, and Ruy.
hectares of arable land were in use, allowing for the reduced to fragmented remnants of their former ranges. In
Klein. Eric continues to work as the Assistant Directing Architect on an ongoing archeological dig in Aphrodisias, Turkey
harvesting of an ample food supply for the majority of a either case, significant loss of biodiversity and disruption
hosted by NYU and Oxford. He has spent a year building hand-dug wells and surveying regions for hydrological resources
human population now in excess of 6.4 billion. These of ecosystem functions on a global scale has been the
in Ghana, West Africa. Publications include: editor and contributor of MODELS: 306090 books, and is currently co-author-
estimates includeTheory:
grazing1968 landsto(formerly grasslands) result (Wilson, 1992).
ing Architectural the Present, A Criticalfor
History with Harry Francis Mallgrave. Articles and reviews have
cattle, representing
appeared in A + U, The nearly 85%ARCH+,
Scientist, of all land thatincould
Studies the History of Gardens and Designed Landscapes. Eric is a member
support a minimum level of agriculture. Farming also While no one questions the value of farming in
of the Smart Geometry workshops hosted by Bentley Systems. In 2007, he participated in Life In Space at Olafur Eliasson
produces
Studio, anda was
wide variety
a guest of grains
speaker at thethat feed millions
Serpentine PavilionofPark Nights us
getting to this point in our evolutionary history, even
2007, Public Experiment: Models are Real.
head of cattle and other domesticated farm animals. our earliest efforts caused irreversible damage to the
According the US Department of Agriculture, in 2003 natural landscape, and are so wide-spread now that it
nearly 33 million head of cattle were produced in the threatens to alter the rest of the course of our life on this
United States. In order to support this large a scale of planet. The silt-laden soils of the floodplains of the Tigris
agricultural activity, millions of hectares of hardwood and and Euphrates River valleys serve as a good example in
coniferous forest (temperate and tropical), grasslands, and this regard. This region was the cradle of western

CTBUH 8th World Congress 2008 

 The Vertical Farm:
The sky-scraper as vehicle for a sustainable urban agriculture

Dickson Despommier1 and Eric Ellingsen2

1
Department of Environmental Health Sciences, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, 60 Haven Ave, Rm. 100,
New York, New York 10032, Email: ddd1@columbia.edu
2
College of Architecture, Illinois Institute of Technology, S.R. Crown Hall, 3360 S. State St
Chicago, Il 60616, Email: ellingsen@iit.edu

Abstract
The human population has reached some 6.4 billion individuals. Over 800 million hectares (i.e., nearly 38% of the total
landmass of the earth) is committed to producing crops to support this still growing population. Farming has
dramatically transformed the landscape, replacing and redefining functional ecosystems. Undeniably, a reliable food
supply has allowed for the evolution of culturally robust societies. Ironically, farming has created a set of new hazards
unique to activities involved with the production of food, and has exacerbated many older ones. Exposure to toxic levels
of agrochemicals (pesticides, fungicides) and a wide spectrum of geohelminths are transmitted with regularity at the
tropical and sub-tropical agricultural interface. Emerging infections, many of which are viral zoonoses (e.g., Ebola,
Lassa fever) have adapted to the human host following our encroachment into their environments. In 50 years, the
human population is expected to increase to some 8.3 billion individuals. Feeding these new arrivals will require an
additional 109 hectares of farmland; land that does not exist. Vertical, urban farming in tall buildings involves fully
sustainable energy use and creation in a new and literal organic relationship between engineering, architecture,
technology, and global agricultural imperatives in local based community solutions.

Keywords: urban farming, tall buildings, sustainable energy use and creation

Introduction

Figure 1: hypothetical vertical farm : Images courtesy Gordon Graff

As of January 2006, approximately 800 million
hectares of arable land were in use, allowing for the
harvesting of an ample food supply for the majority of a
human population now in excess of 6.4 billion. These
estimates include grazing lands (formerly grasslands) for
cattle, representing nearly 85% of all land that could
support a minimum level of agriculture. Farming also
produces a wide variety of grains that feed millions of
head of cattle and other domesticated farm animals.
According the US Department of Agriculture, in 2003
nearly 33 million head of cattle were produced in the
United States. In order to support this large a scale of
agricultural activity, millions of hectares of hardwood and
coniferous forest (temperate and tropical), grasslands, and
wetlands were sacrificed, or at the very least severely
reduced to fragmented remnants of their former ranges. In
either case, significant loss of biodiversity and disruption
of ecosystem functions on a global scale has been the
result (Wilson, 1992).
While no one questions the value of farming in
getting us to this point in our evolutionary history, even
our earliest efforts caused irreversible damage to the
natural landscape, and are so wide-spread now that it
threatens to alter the rest of the course of our life on this
planet. The silt-laden soils of the floodplains of the Tigris
and Euphrates River valleys serve as a good example in
this regard. This region was the cradle of western

 CTBUH 8th World Congress 2008

civilization attributable solely to the early invention of
food growing technologies (mostly wheat cultivation).
The land was soon degraded below a minimum level of
food production due to erosion caused by intensive,
primitive farming practices that rapidly depleted the earth
of its scant supply of nutrients, while mis-managed
irrigation projects were often interrupted by wars and
out-of-season flooding events. Traditional farming
practices (i.e., non-high tech) continue to this day to
produce massive loss of topsoil, while excluding the
possibility for long-term carbon sequestration in the form
of trees and other permanent woody plants (Williams,
2003).
According to the IFA (International Fertilizer
Industry Association), Agrochemicals, especially
fertilizers, are used in almost every commercial farming
scheme due to the demand for cash crops that require
more nutrients from the substrate that it can provide.
Fertilizer use is expensive and encourages the growth of
weeds, making herbicide use almost a requirement. In
commercial ventures, farming involves the production of
single crop species, most of which are vulnerable to
attack from a wide variety of microbes and arthropods
(Carson, 1962; Zupan, 2003)). The agrochemical
industries have, over just a short period of time (50+yrs),
responded to these biological pressures, producing an
astounding array of chemical deterrents that have, up to
very recently, been able to control these unwanted guests
attempting to sit at our table. The regular application of
pesticides and herbicides has facilitated an
ever-increasing agricultural bounty, but many arthropod
and plant species have developed at least some level of
resistance to both classes of compounds. As the result,
higher and higher doses of these products are needed to
do the same job as the year before, thus making
agricultural runoff the single most damaging source of
pollution. In the majority of intensive farming settings
following even mild rain events, a toxic mix of
agrochemicals leaves the fields and contaminates
surrounding ecotones with predictable regularity. The
ecological consequences of runoff have been nothing
short of devastating. Furthermore, human health risks are
also associated with high exposures to some
agrochemicals (Molyneux, 2003). However, many
chemicals manifest their toxic effects in the human body
in ways far more subtle than, say for instance DDT and
the thinning of birds of prey egg-shells, making them
difficult to implicate in the disease process (Stromquist,
Burmeister, 2003).
Farming itself is an activity fraught with health
risks. The mechanisms of transmission for numerous
agents of disease (e.g., the schistosomes, malaria, some
forms of leishmaniasis, geohelminths) are linked to a
wide variety of traditional agricultural practices (e.g.,
using human feces as fertilizer, irrigation, plowing,
sowing, harvesting). These illnesses take a huge toll on
human health, disabling large populations, thus removing
them from the flow of commerce, and this is especially
the case in the poorest countries. In fact, they are often
the root cause of their impoverished situation. Trauma
injuries are considered a normal consequence of farming
by most who engage in this activity and are particularly
common among “slash and burn” subsistence farmers. It
is reasonable to expect that as the human population
continues to grow, these problems will worsen at ever
increasing rates.
To address these problems and those perceived to
soon emerge onto the horizon, an alternate way of food
production was proposed; namely growing large amounts
of produce within the confines of high-rise buildings.
This idea appeared to offer a practical, new approach to
preventing further encroachment into the already highly
altered natural landscape. The Vertical Farm Project was
established in 2001, and is an on-going activity at the
Mailman School of Public Health at Columbia University
in New York City [figure 1-5]. It is in its virtual stages of
development, having survived 4 years of critical thinking
in the classroom and worldwide exposure on the internet
to become an accepted notion worthy of consideration at
some practical level. We have identified an extensive list
of reasons why vertical farming may represent a viable
solution to global processes as diverse as hunger,
population growth, and restoration of ecological
functions and services (e.g., returning land to natural
process, carbon sequestration, etc.). If vertical farming
(VF) were to become widely adopted, then the following
advantages would most likely be realized:
1. Year-round crop production; 1 indoor acre is
equivalent to 4-6 outdoor acres or more, depending upon
the crop (e.g., strawberries: 1 indoor acre = 30 outdoor
acres).
2. VF holds the promise of no crop failures due to
droughts, floods, pests, etc..
3. All VF food will be grown organically employing
chemically defined diets specific to each plant and animal
species: no herbicides, pesticides, or fertilizers.
4. VF eliminates agricultural runoff.
5. VF would allow farmland to be returned to the
natural landscape, thus restoring ecosystem functions
(e.g., increases biodiversity) and services (e.g., air
purification).
6. VF would greatly reduce the incidence of many
infectious diseases that are acquired at the agricultural
interface by avoiding use of human feces as fertilizer for
edible crops.
7. VF converts black and gray water into potable
water by engineering the collection of the water realized
through evapotranspiration.
8. VF adds energy back to the grid via methane
generation from composting non-edible parts of plants
and animals.
9. VF dramatically reduces fossil fuel use (no tractors,
plows, shipping.).
10. VF eliminates much of the need for storage and
CTBUH 8th World Congress 2008 
preservation, thus reducing dramatically the population of
vermin (rats, mice, etc.) that feed on reserves of food.
11. VF converts abandoned urban properties into food
production centers.
12. VF creates sustainable environments for urban
centers.
13. VF creates new employment opportunities.
14. VF could provide year round production of
medically valuable plants (e.g., the anti-malarial
plant-derived artemesinin).
15. VF could be used for the large-scale production of
sugar (sucrose) to be used in the revolutionary new
method for the production of non-polluting gasoline.
Defining the vertical farm
Figures 2-4: hypothetical vertical farm : images courtesy Waimond Ip
Indoor farming (e.g., hydroponics and aeroponics)
has existed for some time. Strawberries, tomatoes,
peppers, cucumbers, herbs, and spices grown in this
fashion have made their way to the world’s markets in
quantity over the last 5-10 years. Most of these operations
are small when compared to factory farms, but unlike
their outdoor counterparts, they produce crops year-round.
Japan, Scandinavia, New Zealand, the United States, and
Canada have thriving greenhouse industries. Freshwater
fishes (e.g., tilapia, trout, stripped bass, carp), and a wide
variety of crustaceans and mollusks (e.g., shrimp,
crayfish, mussels) have also been commercialized in this
 CTBUH 8th World Congress 2008
way. Fowl and pigs are well within the capabilities of
indoor farming, and if we were to proceed to do so, offers
some interesting advantages in addition to providing the
world with a convenient food supply. For example, if
chickens and ducks were to be raised entirely indoors,
then the current epidemic of avian influenza might well
have been aborted, or at the very least, significantly
reduced in scope. None have been configured as
multi-story entities. In contrast, cattle, horses, sheep,
goats, and other large farm animals seem to fall well
outside the paradigm of urban agriculture.
Figures 5-6: hypothetical vertical farm : images courtesy Waimond Ip
What is proposed here differs radically from what
currently exists; namely to scale up the scope of
operations, in which a wide variety of produce is
harvested in quantity enough to sustain even the largest of
cities without significantly relying on resources beyond
the urban footprint. Our group has determined that a
single vertical farm with an architectural footprint of one
square New York City block and rising just 30 stories
(approximately 3 million square feet) could provide
enough calories (2,000 cal/day/person) to comfortably
accommodate the needs of 50,000 people, and mainly by
employing technologies currently available. Constructing
the ideal vertical farm with a far greater yield per square
foot will require additional research in many areas –
hydrobiology, material sciences, structural and
mechanical engineering, industrial microbiology, plant
and animal genetics, architecture and design, public
health, waste management, physics, and urban planning,
to name but a few.
Yet, despite the obvious enthusiasm for the idea,
there are cautions to consider. High-rise food-producing
buildings will only succeed if they function by mimicking
ecological process; namely by safely and efficiently
re-cycling everything organic, and re-cycling “used”
water (e.g., human and animal waste), turning it back into
drinking water. Most important, there must be strong,
government-supported economic incentives to the private
sector, as well as to universities and local government to
fully develop the concept. Ideally, vertical farms must be
cheap to construct, durable and safe to operate, and
independent of economic subsides and outside support
(i.e., show a profit at the end of the day). If these
conditions can be realized through an ongoing,
comprehensive research program, urban agriculture could
provide an abundant and varied food supply for the 60%
of the people that will be living within cities by the year
2030.
Waste management and urban sustainability
Today, we face the challenge of trying to
understand enough about the process of ecological
balance to incorporate it into our daily lives (i.e., do no
harm). Our willingness to try to solve problems that we
ourselves have created is a measure of our selflessness
and altruistic behavior as a species. Thus, the second
most important reason to consider converting to vertical
farming relates to how we handle waste (Malkow, 2004;
Eckenfelder, 1999). Waste management throughout the
world, regardless of location, is in most cases
unacceptable, both from a public health and social
perspective, and exposure to untreated effluent often
carries with it serious health risks. However, even in the
best of situations, most solid waste collections are simply
compacted and relegated to landfills, or in a few instances,
incinerated to generate energy. Liquid wastes are
processed (digested, then de-sludged), then treated with a
bactericidal agent (e.g., chlorine) and released into the
nearest convenient body of water. More often in less
developed countries, it is discarded without treatment,
greatly increasing the health risks associated with
infectious disease transmission due to fecal
contamination.
All solid waste can be re-cycled (returnable cans,
bottles, cardboard packages, etc.) and/or used in energy
generating schemes with technologies that are currently
in use. A major source of organic waste comes from the
restaurant industry (Wie, 2003). Methane generation from
this single resource could contribute significantly to
energy generation, and may be able to supply enough to
run vertical farms without the use of electricity from the
grid. For example, in New York City there are more than
21,000 food service establishments, all of which produce
significant quantities of organic waste, and they have to
pay to have the city cart it off. Often the garbage sits out
on the curb, sometimes for hours to days, prior to
collection. This allows time for vermin (e.g., cockroaches,
rats, mice) the privilege of dining out at some of the
finest restaurants in the western hemisphere, albeit
second-hand. Vertical farming may well result in a
situation in which restaurants would be paid (according to
the caloric content?) for this valuable commodity,
allowing for a greater measure of income for an industry
with a notoriously small (2-5%) profit margin (Mann,
1999). In New York City, on average 80-90 restaurants
close down each year, the vast majority of which are
precipitated by inspections conducted by the New York
City Department of Health. A common finding by
inspectors in these situations is vermin (mouse and rat
droppings, cockroaches) and unsanitary conditions that
encourage their life styles.
Agricultural runoff despoils vast amounts of
surface and groundwater (Foster, 2003; Holt, 2000).
Vertical farming offers the possibility of greatly reducing
the quantity of this non-point source of water pollution.
In addition, it will generate methane from municipal
waste currently being funneled into water pollution
control facilities. The concept of sustainability will be
realized through the valuing of waste as a commodity so
indispensable to the operation of the farm that to discard
something –any thing - would be analogous to siphoning
off a gallons’ worth of gasoline from the family car and
setting it on fire. Natural systems function in a
sustainable fashion by recycling all essential elements
needed to produce the next generation of life. This way of
doing business is being incorporated by NASA engineers
into all future programs that focus on colonizing outer
space. If we are to live in closed systems off the surface
of the earth then the concept of waste becomes an
outdated paradigm. Unfortunately, this goal has yet to be
fully realized by NASA or by the ill-fated Biosphere 2
Project (Allen, 1997). If we are to live in a balanced
extraterrestrial environment, we must somehow learn
how to do it here first.
Sludge, derived from waste water treatment plants
of many, but not all cities throughout the US, and treated
with a patented process referred to as advanced alkaline
stabilization with subsequent accelerated drying, is being
turned into high grade topsoil and sold as such to the
farming community at-large by N-Viro Corporation,
Toledo, Ohio. The limiting factor in using municipal
sludge for farming appears to be heavy metal
contamination, mostly from copper, mercury, zinc,
arsenic, and chromium (Scancar, 2000). Vertical farms
will be engineered to take in black or gray water,
depending upon availability, and restore it to near
drinking water quality using bioremediation
(Bonaventura, 1997) and other technologies yet to be
perfected. Fast growing inedible plant species (e.g.,
cattail, duckweed, sawgrass, Spartina spp.), often referred
to collectively as a living machine (Todd, 1994; Todd,
Josephson, 1996) will be used to help remediate
contaminated water. They will be periodically harvested
for methane generation employing state-of-the-art
composting methods yielding energy to help run the
facility. By-products of burning methane – CO 2, heat,
and water – can be added back into the atmosphere of the
vertical farm to aid in fostering optimal plant growth. The
resulting purified water will be used to grow edible plant
species. Ultimately, any water source that emerges from
the vertical farm should be drinkable, thus completely
re-cycling it back into the community that brought it to
CTBUH 8th World Congress 2008 
the farm to begin with. Harvesting water generated from
evapo-transpiration appears to have some virtue in this
regard, since the entire farm will be enclosed. A cold
brine pipe system could be engineered to aid in the
condensation and harvesting of moisture released by
plants. Nonetheless, several varieties of new technology
will be needed before sewage can be handled in a routine,
safe manner within the confines of the farm. Lessons
learned from the nuclear power plant industry should be
helpful in this regard.
Some "proofs of concept"
1. Year round crop production
Traditional farming takes place over an annual
growth cycle that is wholly dependent upon what happens
outside. Significant deviation (e.g., drought or flood) for
more than several weeks away from conditions necessary
for insuring a good yield has predictable, negative effects
on the lives of millions of people dependent upon those
items for their yearly food supply (Cairns, 2000). Every
year, somewhere in the world, crops suffer from too little
water and wither on the spot, or are lost to severe
flooding, hailstorms, tornados, earthquakes, hurricanes,
cyclones, fires, and other destructive events of nature.
Many of these phenomena are at best difficult to predict,
and at worst are impossible to react to in time to prevent
the losses associated with them. Climate change regimens
will surely complicate an already complex picture with
respect to predicting crop yields (Tilman, 2001).
In addition to losses due to bad weather events, an
unavoidable portion of what is grown spoils in the fields
prior to harvest time. Another large portion of harvest,
regardless of the kind of plant or grain, is laid waste by a
variety of opportunistic life forms (i.e., fungi, bacteria,
insects, rodents) after storage. In Africa, locusts remain
an ever-present threat (Abate, 2000), devastating vast
areas of farmland in just days. Finally, armed conflict
halts all normal human activity in any given war zone.
Faming usually suffers greatly during those stressful
times, with crops being burned or otherwise made
unavailable by those wishing to severely limit the
opposition’s access to a reliable food supply.
Vertical farming obviates all external natural
processes as confounding elements in the production of
food. Growing food within urban centers will lower or
even eliminate the consumption of fossil fuels needed to
deliver them to the consumer, and will eliminate forever
the need for burning fossil fuels during the act of farming.
So where does the energy come from that is needed to run
the vertical farm? Ideally, they will take full advantage of
technologies centered around methane digestion of the
inedible portions of what is grown (i.e., biogas
production). Solar, wind, and tidal power could also
contribute to reducing their dependence on fossil fuels.
Iceland and other geologically active regions (e.g., Italy,
New Zealand) will have the distinct advantage of
harnessing geothermal energy, which they have at their
 CTBUH 8th World Congress 2008
disposal in abundance.
2. No-cost restoration of ecosystems: the principle
of benign neglect
Converting most food production to vertical
farming holds the promise of restoring ecosystem
services and functions. There is good reason to believe
that an almost full recovery of many of the world’s
endangered terrestrial ecosystems will occur simply by
abandoning farmland and allowing the countryside to
“cure” itself (Gunderson, 2000). This belief stems, in part,
from numerous anecdotal observations as to the current
biological state of some regions that were once severely
damaged either by now-extinct civilizations or by
over-farming, and, in part, from data derived from the
National Science Foundation-sponsored long-term
ecological research program (LTER), begun in 1980, on a
wide variety of fragmented ecosystems purposely set
aside for study subsequent to an extended period of
encroachment. One of the most intensively studied of
these fragmented ecozones is Hubbard Brook in northern
New Hampshire (Likens, 2001; Likens, 1970). The area
is a mixed boreal forest watershed that has been
extensively harvested at least three times in modern times
(1700s-1967). The Hubbard Brook LTER lists its research
objectives as: vegetation structure and production;
dynamics of detritus in terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems;
atmosphere-terrestrial-aquatic ecosystem linkages;
heterotroph population dynamics; effects of human
activities on ecosystems. A portion of the watershed was
clear-cut and the trees left in place, in contrast to farming
regimes in which trees are removed to make way for crop
production. Re-growth of some plants (shade intolerants)
occurred within 3 years. By 20 years, the trees (shade
tolerant plants) grew back to the same density as before
the experiment was begun. These data give credence to
the hypothesis that if vertical farming could replace most
horizontal farming, then ecosystem services that reinforce
a healthy life style (e.g., clean water, clean air, carbon
sequestration) would be restored.
3. Urban sustainability
Natural systems function in a sustainable fashion
by recycling all essential elements for the next generation
of life (Eugene, 2005). One of the toughest challenges
facing urban planners is trying to incorporate the concept
of sustainability into waste (both solid and liquid)
management. Even in the best of situations, most solid
waste collections are compacted and relegated to landfills.
In a few rare instances they are incinerated to generate
energy (Ragossnig, 2005). Liquid wastes are processed,
then treated with a bactericidal agent (e.g., chlorine) and
released into the nearest body of water. More often than
not in less developed countries, it is discarded without
treatment, greatly increasing the health risks associated
with infectious disease transmission due to fecal
contamination (Khosla, 2005). From a technological
perspective, all solid waste can now be efficiently
re-cycled (returnable cans, bottles, cardboard packages,
etc.) and/or used in energy generating schemes with
standard methods that are currently in use (Malkow,
2004). Incorporating modern waste management
strategies into the vertical farm model should work the
first time out without the need for new technologies to
come to the rescue. It must be emphasized that urban
sustainability will only be realized through the valuing of
waste as a commodity, deemed so indispensable that to
discard something –anything - would be analogous to
siphoning off a gallons’ worth of gasoline from the family
car and setting it on fire.
Since agricultural runoff despoils vast amounts of
surface and groundwater (Stalnacke, 2001; Fawell, 2003;
Foster, 2003), any water that emerges from the vertical
farm should be drinkable, re-cycling it back into the
community that brought it to the farm to begin with.
Harvesting water generated from evapo-transpiration
appears to have some virtue in this regard, since the entire
farm will be enclosed. A cold brine piping system could
be engineered to aid in the condensation and harvesting
of moisture released by plants. The only perceived
missing link is the ability to easily handle untreated
human and animal wastes in a safe and efficient fashion.
Several varieties of new technology may be required.
Perhaps lessons learned from the nuclear power industry
in handling plutonium and enriched uranium may prove
helpful in designing new machinery for this purpose.
4. Social benefits of vertical farming
The social benefits of urban agriculture offer a
rewarding set of achievable goals. The first is the
establishment of sustainability as an ethic for human
behavior. This ecological concept is currently only a
property of the natural world. Ecological observations
and studies, beginning with those of J. Teal in Georgia
(Teal, 1962) showed how life behaves with regards to the
sharing of limited energy resources. Tight knit
assemblages of plants and animals evolved into trophic
relationships that allowed for the seamless flow of energy
transfer from one level to the next, regardless of the type
of ecosystem in question (Ricklefs, 2000). In fact, this is
the defining characteristic of all ecosystems. In contrast,
humans, although participants in all terrestrial ecosystems,
have failed to incorporate this same behavior into their
own lives. If vertical farming succeeds, it will establish
the validity of sustainability, irrespective of location or
life form. Vertical farms could become important learning
centers for future generations of city-dwellers,
demonstrating our intimate connectedness to the rest of
the world by mimicking the nutrient cycles that once
again can take place in the natural world that has
re-emerged around them as the result of returning land
back to the natural landscape.
Finally, hydroponic and aeroponic technology has
increased yield potential by more than 23 times while
decreasing water usage by well over 30 times; LED’s
(Light Emitting Diodes, the kinds used in many traffic
lights) and sulfer-mircrowave lamps are being employed
as alternative light sources in agricultural environments
which grow and harvest within ‘biomass production
systems’ and ‘plant research units’ by the Bioregenerative
Life Support Project at Dynamac, Inc., at the Kennedy
Space Center. These are constantly regulated,
environmentally maintained, and hermetically controlled
completely sustainable agricultural solutions which we
have at our disposal today. Nourishing Vertical Farms
right within the intolerably impoverished regions of the
worlds largest urban settings, such as Ethiopia, India,
Central African Republic, the Gaza Strip, etc. is not only
realistic, it’s practical. Taking these ideas from outer
space and deploying these strategies in the space of our
cities is not only rationally feasible it may be one of the
best vehicles we have to take on agricultural challenge of
the near and now future.
References
WILSON E. O. (1992) The Diversity of Life. W.W. Norton & Company,
Pubs.
WILLIAMS M. (2003) Deforesting the Earth. The University of
Chicago Press. Chicago and London.
NATIONAL ASSESSMENT DATABASE, (2002) Environmental
protection Agency.
CARSON R. (1962) Silent Spring. Houghton Mifflin Company, NY,
NY. ZUPAN J. (2003). Perinatal mortality and morbidity in developing
countries. A global view. Med Trop 63:366-8.
MOLYNEUX D.H. (2003). Common themes in changing vector-borne
disease scenarios. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg. 97:129-32.
STROMQUIST A.M, BURMEISTER L.F, et al. (2003).
Characterization of agricultural tasks performed by youth in the
Keokuk County Rural Health Study. Appl Occup Environ Hyg.
18:418-29.
MALKOW T. (2004). Novel and innovative pyrolysis and gasification
technologies for energy efficient and environmentally sound MSW
disposal. Waste Manag. 24:53-79. ECKENFELDER W. W. (1999).
Industrial water pollution control. McGraw-Hill
Science/Engineering/Math; 3 rd ed. P. 600.
WIE S, SHANKLIN C. W, LEE K. E. (2003). A decision tree for
selecting the most cost-effective waste disposal strategy in foodservice
operations. J Am Diet Assoc. 103:475-82.
MANN L. L, MAC INNIS D, GARDINER N. (1999). Menu Analysis
for Improved Customer Demand and Profitability in Hospital
Cafeterias. Can J Diet Pract Res. 60:5-10
FOSTER S. S. D, CHILTON P. J. (2003). Groundwater: the processes
and global significance of aquifer degradation. Phil Trans: Biol Sci.
358: 1957-1972.
HOLT M. S. (2000). Sources of chemical contaminants and routes into
the freshwater environment. Food Chem Toxicol. 38(1 Suppl):S21-7.
ALLEN J. P, NELSON M, ALLING A. (2003). The legacy of
Biosphere 2 for the study of biospherics and closed ecological systems.
Adv Space Res. 31:1629-39.
SCANCAR J, MILACIC R, STRAZAR M, BURICA O. (2000). Total
metal concentrations and partitioning of Cd, Cr, Cu, Fe, Ni and Zn in
sewage sludge. Sci. Total Environ. 250:9–19.
BONAVENTURA C, JOHNSON F.M. (1997). Healthy environments
for healthy people: bioremediation today and tomorrow. Environ
Health Perspect. 105:5-20.
TODD J. (1994). From Eco Cities to Living Machines: Ecology as the
Basis of Design North Atlantic Press, Berkeley.
TODD J, JOSEPHSON B. (1996). The design of living machines for
wastewater treatment. Ecological Engineering 6, 109-136.
CAIRNS J. (2000). Sustainability and the future of humankind: two
competing theories of Infinite Substitutability. Politics and the Life
Sciences 1: 27-32.
TILMAN D, FARGIONE J, et al. (2001). Forecasting agriculturally
CTBUH 8th World Congress 2008 
 driven global environmental change. Science. 292: 281-284.
http://www.globalfundforchildren.org/index.htm
http://nutrition.tufts.edu/academic/hungerweb/
ABATE T, VAN HUIS A, AMPOFO J. K. (2000). Pest management
strategies in traditional agriculture: an African perspective. Annu Rev
Entomol.45:631-59.
GUNDERSON L. H. (2000). Ecological resilience –in theory and
application. Ann Rev Ecology Systematics. 31:425-439.
LIKENS G. E. (2001). Ecosystems: Energetics and Biogeochemistry.
pp. 53-88. In: Kress WJ and Barrett G (eds.). A New Century of Biology.
Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington and London.
LIKENS G. E, BORMANN F. H, JOHNSON N. M, FISHER D. W,
PIERCE R. S. (1970). Effects of forest cutting and herbicide treatment
on nutrient budgets in the Hubbard Brook watershed-ecosystem. Ecol.
Monogr. 40:23-47.
EUGENE P, BARRET O. & G. W. (2005) Fundamnetals of Ecolog.
Thomson Brooks/Cole, Pubs. Australia, Canada, United States.
RAGOSSNIG A. M, LORBER K. E. (2005). Combined incineration of
industrial wastes with in-plant residues in fluidized-bed utility
boilers--decision relevant factors. Waste Manag Res. 23:448-56.
KHOSLA R, BHANOT A, KARISHMA S. (2005). Sanitation: a call
on resources for promoting urban child health. Indian Pediatr.
42:1199-206.
MALKOW T. (2004). Novel and innovative pyrolysis and gasification
technologies for energy efficient and environmentally sound MSW
disposal. Waste Manag. 24:53-79.
STALNACKE P, VANDSEMB S. M, VASSILJEV A, GRIMVALL A,
JOLANKAI G. (2001) Changes in nutrient levels in some Eastern
European rivers in response to large-scale changes in agriculture.
Water Sci Technol. 49:29-36.
FAWELL J, NIEUWENHUIJSEN M. J. (2003). Contaminants in
drinking water. British Medical Bulletin 68:199-208.
FOSTER S. S. D, CHILTON P.J. (2003). Groundwater: the processes
and global significance of aquifer degradation. Phil Trans: Biol Sci.
358: 1957-1972.
TEAL J. M. (1962). Energy flow in a salt marsh in Georgia. Ecology.
43:614-624.
RICKLEFS R. E. (2000). The economy of nature. WH Freeman & Co.
5th ed.

 CTBUH 8th World Congress 2008

View publication stats